I am making digital silver prints for a Magnum photographer... if the capture is digital ( a large number of Magnum Photographers ) then what is wrong with a digital print... I see no issue in this. The purity of the enlarger to print is overrated.. so many lousy prints have been made this way... the number is in the millions.. digital has not changed this fact.
I've been a printer for a long time. I've done seemingly millions of darkroom prints, all kinds of alt process and had a business in the late 70's/early 80's in NYC that printed in platinum for other photographers (including Avedon). I've been doing inkjet since about 2002 sometime. The truth is that a print looks great when someone takes the time to make it so - in any technology. You can't tell me that any camera is inherently incapable of making a great image. You can't say that about printers, or printers vs darkroom vs alt process, etc., either. Its not the device, its the person behind it. It's a matter of mastering the control of something to the point it becomes expressive.
I just had a friend over, another photographer, and I showed him one of my latest prints. I showed it to him right next to a platinum print of the same image. There is no discernible difference, if anything the inkjet was better. I keep hearing about people talking about how there is some virtue in darkroom vs something else. There isn't. It's like saying social documentary photography is better than landscape. They are different. I like them both. I happen to like to shoot landscape but it doesn't mean I don't appreciate the other (altho' there are genres I could do without entirely). If you like darkroom prints, by all means make them. If you like inkjet prints, or alt process, by all means make those. And make them better and better until they are exquisite.
Lenny
We are even seeing this with historical negatives ... scanning and then making digital negs to print rather than putting the original neg into an enlarger... in these cases the client comes to myThere is nothing wrong at all with it. I would assume contemporary Magnum photographers that use digital cameras would print however they like or hire someone like yourself to see their work to completion. It's all good. I was describing my personal habits only, not suggesting anyone follow my lead of course.
We are even seeing this with historical negatives ... scanning and then making digital negs to print rather than putting the original neg into an enlarger... in these cases the client comes to my
shop with the original negs, we scan immediately so that the originals go back to safe keeping..... this may be contrary or blasphemy to some here but there are cases where this is absolutely
the best approach..
75 % of my business in printing this day is from digital files to inkjet and now surprisingly Alternative Wet Prints is half of my printing methods. Very rarely will I print from original.. the last major show of enlarger prints
I did was 40 Vivian Maier negatives ... I can tell you the period of time they were in my shop made me nervous, just housing them.
Part of the problem with this discussion is that if the print you see has been made by Bob, it probably doesn't matter which procedure he used - it will be a really good print.We are even seeing this with historical negatives ... scanning and then making digital negs to print rather than putting the original neg into an enlarger... in these cases the client comes to my
shop with the original negs, we scan immediately so that the originals go back to safe keeping..... this may be contrary or blasphemy to some here but there are cases where this is absolutely
the best approach..
75 % of my business in printing this day is from digital files to inkjet and now surprisingly Alternative Wet Prints is half of my printing methods. Very rarely will I print from original.. the last major show of enlarger prints
I did was 40 Vivian Maier negatives ... I can tell you the period of time they were in my shop made me nervous, just housing them.
I couldn't care less if it is super inkjet print by million wet prints in the past printer. What I see is the only authority. I'm sorry.
Yes, majority doesn't care or able to see the difference. But I do.
Prints from digital cameras have zero value to me. I just can't see anything valuable in them. It could be good image, but it just missing something. Always. It doesn't mean it could be sold for high price to someone. But not to me.
Prints from scans are slightly better. Sometimes they are good, to be honest.
But if I really want to see prints, I look at pre-scan, true analogue color regular lab prints at home and go to museums and galleries for bw darkroom prints. It just feels totally different from inks. Not really better, but unique and different. Every inkjet print is nothing but mass produce, putting "I print millions, I spend time" on them, doesn't show any difference. "Lipstick on the pig", sorry.
I do use inkjet and darkroom as well. Aesthetically I'm with him:
Avedon did platinum prints ?I've been a printer for a long time. I've done seemingly millions of darkroom prints, all kinds of alt process and had a business in the late 70's/early 80's in NYC that printed in platinum for other photographers (including Avedon). I've been doing inkjet since about 2002 sometime. The truth is that a print looks great when someone takes the time to make it so - in any technology. You can't tell me that any camera is inherently incapable of making a great image. You can't say that about printers, or printers vs darkroom vs alt process, etc., either. Its not the device, its the person behind it. It's a matter of mastering the control of something to the point it becomes expressive.
I just had a friend over, another photographer, and I showed him one of my latest prints. I showed it to him right next to a platinum print of the same image. There is no discernible difference, if anything the inkjet was better. I keep hearing about people talking about how there is some virtue in darkroom vs something else. There isn't. It's like saying social documentary photography is better than landscape. They are different. I like them both. I happen to like to shoot landscape but it doesn't mean I don't appreciate the other (altho' there are genres I could do without entirely). If you like darkroom prints, by all means make them. If you like inkjet prints, or alt process, by all means make those. And make them better and better until they are exquisite.
Lenny
I just realized I am talking in a 8 year old thread.... Its funny how this is still a relevant topic.
The observation could be made that you are a "tired poster" and not relevant.It's a tired topic, not "relevant".
It's a tired topic, not "relevant".
+1
i was walking past a local photog shop a while back, a dozen really great prints in the window (yup, been a long time, done seemingly, etc.). i couldn't decide whether they were inkjet or wet, so i walked in and asked. 'half and half,' was the answer
We are even seeing this with historical negatives ... scanning and then making digital negs to print rather than putting the original neg into an enlarger... in these cases the client comes to my
shop with the original negs, we scan immediately so that the originals go back to safe keeping..... this may be contrary or blasphemy to some here but there are cases where this is absolutely
the best approach..
75 % of my business in printing this day is from digital files to inkjet and now surprisingly Alternative Wet Prints is half of my printing methods. Very rarely will I print from original.. the last major show of enlarger prints
I did was 40 Vivian Maier negatives ... I can tell you the period of time they were in my shop made me nervous, just housing them.
Maybe one day if I can get the right permission to do so.. I cannot talk about client work in some cases, I have an interesting history with Vivian negs before she was even known to the photo community.Interesting! How about posting some sort of essay about that experience ?
ever been to blue moon camera and machine ? they have a commercial printing business and enlarge/print negativesA photo shop is about the last place I'd look for evidence of good prints ..
maybe, or maybe its just person opinion? there is a big difference between file from a digital camera printed with a pigment or ink jet &c printer and a "traditional print"Important to remember, there is no such thing as "digital world" in photography...that notion is just a leftover from the old days.
IMHO, with so many photographers shooting digital, there will be fewer photographers doing wet prints. However, a fine art or portrait photographer will have an edge by selling analog prints because the hand crafting. Darkroom printing has become fine art printing just like lithography and etchings. I think in the commercial photography world and photojournalism, analog photography adds little.Hello-
Are there any primarily/completely digital photographers around that pay much attention to the benefits/qualities of traditional wet prints (RA-4 or Black and White) when it comes to printing their digital images? Do people care about the fact that their inkjet prints are made with ink?
Drew - I have not heard so much bullshit in years... obviously you do not know any of the owners of good galleries...I think you need to get out more.Most owners of "fine art galleries" are just commodities brokers. Sell a well-known signature, that's all. Or show something allegedly new or zany, which has always been the case. Most don't give a damn about the specific medium; nor do their clients. There are obviously a few notable exceptions, who actually have some personal taste and insight. It's a risky business model at best. I just don't give a damn. People who have bought my prints simply wanted my prints, period. But I do think there's a growing yearning for high-quality craft that shows it, once people actually see it in person, versus the web.
But speaking of webs: the most important factor in a gallery is location, location, location, namely, where to put a big spider web to catch suckers with lots of money to waste on something big, and no taste at all.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?